Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT

431 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2021#42 most cited

What is Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Section 80P(4) serves as a proviso to Section 80P(1) and (2), excluding only cooperative banks that are cooperative societies and possess an RBI license for banking business. Its purpose is to exclude cooperative banks operating like commercial banks that lend money to the public.

999

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT · Section 80P(4) · Section 80P(1) · Section 80P(2) · cooperative bank deduction · RBI license · banking business · cooperative society · deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) · exclusion from 80P · 431 ITR 1

Also reported as

123 Taxmann.com 161279 Taxmann 75

Sections most often in play

Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 80P(2)(a)(i)Section 80PSection 143(3)Section 250Section 2(19)Section 56

Issues it is cited on

section 22(1)(b)section 5(b)section 80p(1)section 80p(4)section 2(19)section 80p(2)(c)section 22(1)section 80p(2)(a)section 80p(2)(a)(i)section 70section 80p(2)section 80p(2)(d)

Judgments citing Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1217/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…23. It was submitted that observations in the paragraph 10 of Canara Housing are not ratio decidendi and therefore, not binding. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd Vs CIT 431 ITR 1. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing (supra) is no longer good law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Meeta Gutgutia(SLP C.No. 16 16287 of 2018) 405 ITR Statute 28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed against the Delhi High Court judgment in PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1216/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…23. It was submitted that observations in the paragraph 10 of Canara Housing are not ratio decidendi and therefore, not binding. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd Vs CIT 431 ITR 1. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing (supra) is no longer good law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Meeta Gutgutia(SLP C.No. 16 16287 of 2018) 405 ITR Statute 28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed against the Delhi High Court judgment in PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1215/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…23. It was submitted that observations in the paragraph 10 of Canara Housing are not ratio decidendi and therefore, not binding. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd Vs CIT 431 ITR 1. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing (supra) is no longer good law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Meeta Gutgutia(SLP C.No. 16 16287 of 2018) 405 ITR Statute 28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed against the Delhi High Court judgment in PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1214/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…23. It was submitted that observations in the paragraph 10 of Canara Housing are not ratio decidendi and therefore, not binding. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd Vs CIT 431 ITR 1. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing (supra) is no longer good law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Meeta Gutgutia(SLP C.No. 16 16287 of 2018) 405 ITR Statute 28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed against the Delhi High Court judgment in PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1213/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…23. It was submitted that observations in the paragraph 10 of Canara Housing are not ratio decidendi and therefore, not binding. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd Vs CIT 431 ITR 1. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing (supra) is no longer good law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Meeta Gutgutia(SLP C.No. 16 16287 of 2018) 405 ITR Statute 28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed against the Delhi High Court judgment in PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395…

Shri. Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1212/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…23. It was submitted that observations in the paragraph 10 of Canara Housing are not ratio decidendi and therefore, not binding. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd Vs CIT 431 ITR 1. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing (supra) is no longer good law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Meeta Gutgutia(SLP C.No. 16 16287 of 2018) 405 ITR Statute 28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed against the Delhi High Court judgment in PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1211/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…23. It was submitted that observations in the paragraph 10 of Canara Housing are not ratio decidendi and therefore, not binding. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd Vs CIT 431 ITR 1. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing (supra) is no longer good law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Meeta Gutgutia(SLP C.No. 16 16287 of 2018) 405 ITR Statute 28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed against the Delhi High Court judgment in PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395…

Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Chikkamagaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mysore

ITA 568/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R.Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ative Society Ltd. v. Pri.CIT (order dated 15.04.2021). The learned AR submitted that the Tribunal in above cited case, directed the A.O. to consider the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT 431 ITR 1, de horse the observation of CIT u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. 6. The learned Departmental Representative also did not raise any objection for giving a similar direction in the instant case. 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (supra)…

The Karnataka Judicial Officers Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 5(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 58/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar, JCIT(DR)
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. B.R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Karnataka Judicial The Income-Tax Officer, Officers Credit Co-operative Ward-5(2)(3), Society Ltd., Bengaluru. 1st Floor, City Civil Court Vs. Complex, K.G Road, Bengaluru-560 009. PAN – AAAAT 1226 C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ravishankar S.V, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Sajit Kumar, JCIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 26-04-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 23-06-2021 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed by the a…

Vainganga Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd, Bhandara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhandara

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 49/NAG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Vainganga Nagari Sahakari Pat Vs. Ito – Ward 2, Sanstha Ltd., Bhandara Nirwan Bhawan, Tilak Ward, Bhandara, Maharashtra - 441904 Pan : Aabat0078K Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Manoj Soni Revenue By Smt. Agnes P Thomas Date Of Hearing 21-06-2021 Date Of Pronouncement 21-06-2021 आदेश / Order Per R.S.Syal, Vp : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals)-2, Nagpur On 31-01-2020 In Relation To The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Only Issue Raised In This Appeal Is Against The Denial Of Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 3. Briefly Stated, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Maharashtra Co-

Section 2(19)Section 80P(2)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR – VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Vainganga Nagari Sahakari Pat Vs. ITO – Ward 2, Sanstha Ltd., Bhandara Nirwan Bhawan, Tilak Ward, Bhandara, Maharashtra - 441904 PAN : AABAT0078K Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Manoj Soni Revenue by Smt. Agnes P Thomas Date of hearing 21-06-2021 Date of pronouncement 21-06-2021 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(Appeals)-2, Nagpur on…

M/S. the Puttur Primary Co-Operative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Limited, Dakshina Kannada vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1, Puttur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1449/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ITA No.1449/Bang/2019 The Puttur Primary Co-op Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Ltd., Dakshina Kannada IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Puttur Primary Co-op Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Ltd. 01, Puttur PCARD Bank Ltd. ITO Ward-1 Vs. Santhekatte Puttur Puttur Dakshina Kannada 574 201 PAN NO : AAALT0387M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R. Date of Hearing : 20.04.2021 Date of Pronouncement…

The Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Texas Instruments India Pvt Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/141/2020HC Karnataka21 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

Section 143(2)Section 194Section 2Section 206ASection 40Section 80J

…I.T.A. NO.141 OF 2020 c/w I.T.A. NO.151 OF 2020 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ I.T.A. No.141 OF 2020 C/W I.T.A. No.151 OF 2020 IN I.T.A. NO.141 OF 2020 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU, 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560095 2. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, LTU, 7TH FLOOR BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095 … APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND,ADVOCATE-PH) AND: TE…

M/S. Koyyur Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Belthangady vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1, Puttur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1450/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Sheethal S. Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ITA No.1450/Bang/2019 M/s. Koyyur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Belthangady IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. Koyyur Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. 01, Post Koyyur ITO Ward-1 Vs. Belthangady 574 214 Puttur PAN NO : AAAALK0742K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheethal S. Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. R. Premi, D.R. Date of Hearing : 24.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 21.04.2021 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The appeal filed by the ass…

M/S. Bannur Rytara Seva Sahakari Sangha Limited, Puttur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1, Puttur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 576/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.K.Mallaha Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh B.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…eduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act is covered in favour of the assessee by the latest judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank 3 M/s.Bannur Rytara Seva Sahakari Sangha Ltd.. Ltd. & Ors. v. CIT reported in 431 ITR 1 (SC). As regards the interest earned from deposits made with Co-operative Banks, it was submitted that the same is attributable to carrying on the business activity of the assessee, and therefore, is eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act. 6. The learned Standing Counsel relied on the assessment order and the CIT(A)’s order. 7. I…

M/S. Irde Bettampady Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Society Limited, Puttur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Puttur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 208/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh B.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act is covered in favour of the assessee by the latest judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank 3 M/s.IRDE Bettampady Primary Agricultural Co-op So.Ltd. Ltd. & Ors. v. CIT reported in 431 ITR 1 (SC). As regards the interest earned from deposits made with Co-operative Banks, it was submitted that the same is attributable to carrying on the business activity of the assessee, and therefore, is eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act. 6. The learned Standing Counsel relied on the assessment order and the CIT(A)’s order. 7. I…

M/S. Sri Kanaka Pathina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha, Tumkur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3, Tumkur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2303/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Mar 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.G.S.Prashanth, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh B.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…tion u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act is covered in favour of the assessee by the latest judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank 3 M/s.Sri Kanaka Pathina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha Ltd. & Ors. v. CIT reported in 431 ITR 1 (SC). As regards the interest earned from deposits made with Co-operative Banks, it was submitted that the same is attributable to carrying on the business activity of the assessee, and therefore, is eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act. 6. The learned Standing Counsel relied on the assessment order and the CIT(A)’s order. 7. I…

Shri. Gayatri Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Bagalkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- (1), Bagalkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Ishwar S.Yanni, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(2)Section 16Section 18Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…denying the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. The learned AR relied on the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the 3 Shri Gayatri Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit. case of The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Ors. v. CIT reported in 431 ITR 1 (SC). 6. The learned Standing Counsel for the Department submitted that the assessee has not cooperated with the CIT(A) in providing necessary details, such as, copies of bye-laws, details of investment and deposits, details of income earned from non-members, etc. The learned Standing Counsel relied on the orders of the Bangalore Benches of the Tr…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. M/S.Jagannath Chaudhury

ITA/1/2018HC Orissa18 Dec 2019

Bench: MR. JUSTICE K. S. JHAVERI (CJ),MR. JUSTICE K.R.MOHAPATRA

Sri. M. Bala Narasimha Reddy vs. Income Tax Officer

ITTA/55/2017HC Telangana13 Apr 2017

Bench: J. UMA DEVI,V RAMASUBRAMANIAN